New York Post Front Page Calls Out Ilhan Omar Over 9/11 Remarks

I never thought I'd see the day where the New York Post would step up to the plate and condemn one of their own.

But here it is in full color for all to see.

The New York Post published a denunciation of Rep. Ilhan Omar on Thursday with a front page editorial calling out her remarks that appeared to trivialize the 9/11 terrorist attacks. “Rep Ilhan Omar: 9/11 Was ‘Some People Did Something,'” blared the front cover, which included a full image of the former Twin Towers on fire in the moments before they collapsed. “Here’s your something — 2,977 people dead by terrorism,” it continued.

A line has been crossed, that's crystal clear. And by a far left Somali Woman hell bent on pissing off Americans in the worst way, all the while screaming like a nut case that people are being Islamaphobic.

Funny word isn't it? Islamaphobic. Islam is a cult, so yes it's logical that people would fear it.

And Nancy Pelosi can't seem to muster the words OMAR out of her wretched mouth.

“How pathetic: A member of Congress can’t acknowledge what happened on one of the most horrific days in US history,” a piece from the Post Editorial board continued. “Omar’s cavalier brushing off of the murder of thousands of innocents on 9/11 should shock all Americans, Muslims included.”

Democrats getting hit hard by the returning boomerangs 😆😆😆

a reply to: Artemis12

Sorry NY Post. I just can't buy it. It has to be something behind this.

a reply to: Artemis12

Islam isn't the problem. Extremism in the halls of government is.

There are plenty of progressive Christians and Jews just like her.

Too bad we missed the boat on educating our populous why our way of governance was so special in the world.

Embarrassment to Minnesota.

I'm not usually one to side with the insane extremes no matter what flavor they are, and I cannot stand Ilhan Omar for a variety of reasons. That said, after watching the video where the remark is made, I have to say: I think her words really were misinterpreted. I was all prepared to be outraged myself, but when I actually listened to her say the words, it appeared to me that what she was referring to wasn't 9/11 itself but the (completely understandable) anti-Muslim backlash in its wake.

I could be wrong, of course. But I think the bottom line is that she's just a crappy speaker and she wasn't clear enough in what she was saying. Listening to the words in context, what I got (after a second of "wtf did that even mean?" lol) was "[In the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks], some people [who were convinced that all Muslims were terrorists just waiting to attack] did something [to intimidate and scare American Muslims who had nothing to do with it.]"

Here's the line in context: "Cair was founded after 9/11 because they recognized that some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties."

Her whole topic is the alleged oppression of American Muslims in the the wake of 9/11. It was a vague, poorly-worded sentence, but in the context of the rest of the thought the idea that "some people did something" refers to the attack itself just doesn't make sense. However, if "some people did something" is referring to real or perceived assaults/intimidation of American Muslims, then it fits perfectly with the rest of the the sentence. I.e., "[there was backlash against Muslims] and that [because of that] all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties."

I can't believe I'm defending this hateful person, but in this case I think she was misrepresented. Feel free to flame me but that's my take.

The ridiculous defenses from AOC et al claiming that calling her out is "inciting violence," on the other hand, are purely insane.

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: Artemis12
Islam isn't the problem. Extremism in the halls of government is.
There are plenty of progressive Christians and Jews just like her.
Too bad we missed the boat on educating our populous why our way of governance was so special in the world.

I think Omar is for Muslims what Ocasio is for Democrats. They hate to be represented by a crazy woman but had no better options. That has to be upsetting.

The Post is a Right Wing paper.

originally posted by: Artemis12
I never thought I'd see the day where the New York Post would step up to the plate and condemn one of their own.

I'm not following. What do you mean by condemning one of their own?

originally posted by: riiver
I'm not usually one to side with the insane extremes no matter what flavor they are, and I cannot stand Ilhan Omar for a variety of reasons. That said, after watching the video where the remark is made, I have to say: I think her words really were misinterpreted. I was all prepared to be outraged myself, but when I actually listened to her say the words, it appeared to me that what she was referring to wasn't 9/11 itself but the (completely understandable) anti-Muslim backlash in its wake.

I could be wrong, of course. But I think the bottom line is that she's just a crappy speaker and she wasn't clear enough in what she was saying. Listening to the words in context, what I got (after a second of "wtf did that even mean?" lol) was "[In the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks], some people [who were convinced that all Muslims were terrorists just waiting to attack] did something [to intimidate and scare American Muslims who had nothing to do with it.]"

Here's the line in context: "Cair was founded after 9/11 because they recognized that some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties."

Her whole topic is the alleged oppression of American Muslims in the the wake of 9/11. It was a vague, poorly-worded sentence, but in the context of the rest of the thought the idea that "some people did something" refers to the attack itself just doesn't make sense. However, if "some people did something" is referring to real or perceived assaults/intimidation of American Muslims, then it fits perfectly with the rest of the the sentence. I.e., "[there was backlash against Muslims] and that [because of that] all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties."

I can't believe I'm defending this hateful person, but in this case I think she was misrepresented. Feel free to flame me but that's my take.

The ridiculous defenses from AOC et al claiming that calling her out is "inciting violence," on the other hand, are purely insane.

I think you are correct. Certainly not a fan of hers, but I do think this might be taken out of context.

I hate when lefties do it to conservatives so I can't sit here and defend it agent done to them no matter how much I despise that person.

One of the issues with politics now is we cant have honest conversations without the other side taking comments out if context and trying spin for political gain.

a reply to: riiver

Then why has she doubled down and not stated that she wasn't referring to the 9/11 attack itself.

hmmm

She wants to take away guns because some people did some thing,

originally posted by: JHumm
She wants to take away guns because some people did some thing,

And there sure is a lot of "some people" in Islam that "do something's"...

Weird...

To that I have no answer. Probably sheer bloody-mindedness, honestly; she does seem like a perpetually angry person from what I've seen.

originally posted by: loam

There are plenty of progressive Christians and Jews just like her.

Actually she is the one that keeps bringing up Islam and that the color of her skin gives her the right to say what she says. I say who cares, progressive extremism is all colors and religions.

a reply to: Edumakated

Sometimes it seems like both sides--though it's much, much worse on the left side of the aisle, from what I see--don't even actually hear what the other side said. They take a word or a sentence and run with it, whether it's in context or not. Then they proceed to stick their fingers in their ears and yell "La-la-la, I can't heeeeeear you" for the next six months.

Side A person: "The sky is blue."
Side B person: "What?! The sky absolutely is NOT purple! What are you talking about? You must be completely insane to say the sky is purple! What about green? Is it freakin' green, too? I bet you think it's green. In fact, I KNOW you think it's green because you MUST think it's green if you think it's purple. Jeez. The sky is not--"
Side A person: "I didn't say the sky was---"
Side B person: "You did! You said sky!"
---News reports that Side A person claimed the sky does not exist.

It honestly appears just that nuts to me right now.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: loam

There are plenty of progressive Christians and Jews just like her.

Actually she is the one that keeps bringing up Islam and that the color of her skin gives her the right to say what she says. I say who cares, progressive extremism is all colors and religions.

That's exactly why people are tired of her rhetoric. She's always playing that damned extreme left card, it's also the reason Donald Trump won the Election and will win it again.

originally posted by: Trueman
a reply to: Artemis12

Sorry NY Post. I just can't buy it. It has to be something behind this.

Very well might, everyone knows the NYT and Post and Washington Post are very very Leftdriven. But 911 has hit a lot of people that remember watching their loved ones die. So for her to use that in the nonchalant way that she did, has brought up some deep feelings in people who love their Country and want to defend it. So if there's something behind the New York Times posting of it, I have no evidence as to why, like I have no evidence about why Bush sat there reading an upside down book about airplanes to a class full of little kids.

And lets not forget George Soros and his ties to AOC, which no doubt has ties to the pushing of Omar the anti semitic, anti American anti Gun chick that married her own Brother.

originally posted by: carewemust
Embarrassment to Minnesota.

No , the 5th District of Minnesota appears to be the embarrassment
Omar is just doing what her constituents want.